Positive Behavior Intervention Case Study

Methodologies for the screening, identification and support strategies for students with special needs have developed and expanded overtime, evolving into the best practices for targeting specific interventions based on tiers of needed support. Within the school- or class-wide setting, tiers to assist students, such as the Response to Intervention (RTI) strategies tend to focus on reading and writing as an area to support students across multiple subjects. Response to Intervention, like Intervention and Referral (I&RS) has served as a pathway to screen for struggling learners and differentiate between students needed scaffolded support and those in need of an individualized education program.

Federal legislation enacted by the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provides clear directives on identifying and supporting students with disabilities and identifies thirteen areas of classification. While Response to Intervention programs do not have any specific legal regulations, these programs may be tailored to a district’s specific areas of need and student population ( Martin, 2016).

When considering support systems required for students with “emotional disturbance” as classified under IDEA, it is reasonable to recommend concentration in more than academic skills, such as the language focus typically seen in the Response to Intervention programs.
The Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS) website published by the U. S. Office of Special Education notes that Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS) and Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) is derived from RTI’s intention to provide improved methods of identification practices and supports for special education (Positive Behavior Support Systems, OSEP, 2016).

In Students With Emotional and Behavioral Problems, Joyce Anderson Downing describes essential components of change to implement a successful PBIS system. These are:
A positively worded statement of purpose including expected academic and behavioral outcomes,
Clearly stated, age-appropriate schoolwide rules and expectations related to identified school problems,
Research-validated procedures for teaching desired schoolwide behavior and social
skills,
Procedures, natural incentives and reinforcers for encouraging desired behavioral outcomes, Record keeping procedures to monitor effectiveness of program and allow for data-based decision making.

RTI is typically structured as 3 tiers: tier 1- whole class or whole school receiving quality, scientifically based instructional practices (screening); tier 2- students not adequately progressing in the tier 1 instruction level will receive scaffolded support and increasingly intensive instruction with the intention to meet any gaps and return to tier 1 instruction (data-driven support & progress monitoring); at tier 3- learners still struggling or not showing progress at tier 2 will be provided individualized instruction and supports targeted to their specific areas of need (data-driven support & progress monitoring). When looking at this system, but applying the principals to a student with emotional disturbance, the MTSS or PBIS systems are a parallel supports to RTI models (Sugai, 2009).

PBIS/MTSS, like RTI, also progresses along tiers of application. At the schoolwide level, a core behavioral & social curriculum serves as the core curriculum for all students to follow. Students presenting patterns of difficulty at this level are screened and considered for movement to the 2nd tier. Within this next level, students will more intensive instruction in social behavior and school expectations. This may be achieved in more comprehensive whole class programs, similar to an inclusion class, in social skills clubs, or in supplemental, small group meetings with a teacher or counselor. Progress monitoring at this phase will allow for students to check in with a peer or an instructor/administrator to evaluate progress and brainstorm strategies. Students identified in this phase as in need of further instruction and support will be moved into a third tier, focused on concentrated, individualized plans, such as behavioral contracts and cognitive-behavioral counselling sessions (Sugai, 2009).

While none of these support structures will diagnose a student with an emotional disturbance disability, the response and progress shown while involved in these programs can guide school personnel in recommendations for testing, developing goals & objectives and providing support to these learners. Students struggling in the 2nd and 3rd tiers may be flagged for further testing by the school team, specifically the school psychologist. Some of the assessments to be considered in this situation may include: BASC-3 (Behavior Assessment System for Children, 3rd ed.), Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, DSMD (Devereaux Scales of Mental Disorders). At the 3rd and most thorough support tier for behavior support, at school team may employ the use of behavior & social skill intervention & monitoring systems; these may include: BASC-3 Intervention Guide and Materials, BIMAS (Behavior Intervention and Monitoring Assessment System).

In reviewing the list of IDEA classifications for individual disability, teachers and administrators may feel prepared and experienced in supporting many students.
Supporting students with the classification of emotional disturbance tends to leave many educators feeling unprepared or worse, they may misunderstand these students as inherently “ bad” or “trouble-makers.” Providing educators with explicit training in screening, interventions and progress monitoring targeted to the needs of these struggling students can pave the way to a greater understanding of emotional disorders and their impact in schools and
society.